ArticleBMC cancer2024
Comparative analysis among therapeutic modalities in ruptured hepatocellular carcinoma and identification of imaging predictors for survival.
Article in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Machine learning prediction of 30-day all-cause mortality risk factors in HCC rupture.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSpontaneous rupture of hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) poses a life-threatening complication with a mortality rate of 25-75%. Treatment aims at achieving hemostasis and includes options such as trans-arterial embolization, perihepatic packing, and hepatic resection. The optimal treatment remains a subject of debate. Our retrospective review evaluates these treatments and investigates imaging's role in prognosis for rHCC patients. PURPOSE: We aimed to compare survival outcomes among rHCC patients who received transarterial embolization (TAE), surgery (perihepatic packing, hepatectomy), or best supportive care (BSC), while also identifying predictive imaging factors in these patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsAll patients diagnosed with rHCC and admitted to Maharaj Nakorn Chiangmai Hospital between January 2012 and December 2021 were included. We reviewed clinical features, imaging results, treatment modalities, and outcomes. In order to balance pretreatment confounders, inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was employed. Flexible parametric survival regression was utilized to compare survival outcomes and identify imaging factors predicting the survival of rHCC patients. Hazard ratios (HR) and the difference in restricted mean survival time (RMST) were reported.
resultAmong the 186 rHCC patients included, we observed 90-day and 1-year mortality rates of 64% and 84%, respectively. Both the TAE and surgery groups exhibited significantly lower 1-year mortality rates compared to BSC. The HR were 0.56 (95% CI 0.33-0.96) for TAE and 0.52 (95% CI 0.28-0.95) for surgery compared to BSC. Both the TAE and surgery also significantly extended the 1-yeaar life expectancy post-initial treatment when compared to BSC, with an RMST difference of + 55.40 days (95% CI 30.18-80.63) for TAE vs. BSC and + 68.43 days (95% CI 38.77-98.09) for surgery vs. BSC. The presence of active contrast extravasation and bleeding in both lobes were independent prognostic factors for 1-year survival.
conclusionsTAE and surgical treatments provide comparable survival benefits for rHCC patients, extending survival time by approximately 2 months compared to best supportive care. We strongly recommend active management for all rHCC patients whenever possible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.